Several months ago, the American Arbitration Association gave its panelists free access to ClearBrief, an AI tool specifically designed for lawyers and arbitrators. It’s a closed system. Thus, there’s no danger that documents fed into it ever become part of the worldwide web that is then scraped for use in open AI tools like ChatGPT or Perplexity. I signed up for ClearBrief and have used it in my practice. Here’s a summary of my experience.
Training
ClearBrief has offered both group and individual training. I took advantage of both. I found the group training marginally useful; the pace was way too fast. In contrast, individual training proved enormously helpful. Using one of my pending cases, we focused on the specific difficulties I had using the tool. ClearBrief also provides useful “How To” videos with each function. My continued use of ClearBrief will be essential for me to become comfortable with it and for it to provide real time savings.
Uses
- Checking the record and legal citations.
How often have parties miscited cases or inaccurately portrayed the underlying facts? I am confident that every arbitrator has the same answer to that: quite often. ClearBrief provides an efficient process for arbitrators to check the accuracy of parties’ assertions, whether concerning the record or legal authority.
As a critical first step, any source documents you wish to use must be uploaded into ClearBrief. The tool converts PDFs into searchable PDFs. Transcripts, briefs, pleadings and exhibits can all be loaded for analysis. AAA panelists can import documents on their cases directly from the eCenter by setting up an “ecenter@adr.org” account on ClearBrief, creating a Matter folder there, selecting the documents in the eCenter to be sent, and clicking on the “Send to ClearBrief” button. I use Clio, a document management and timekeeping software program. ClearBrief allows me to import documents directly from Clio. Once loaded, parties’ briefs can be compared to source documents so that an arbitrator can ensure the accuracy of any assertion of law or fact. How does this work?
ClearBrief checks factual assertions against the record (i.e., the source documents). In some cases, counsel provide a citation to the evidentiary record. ClearBrief goes right to that citation, and significantly, provides a color-coded score of how well counsel’s citation matches the record. It also provides suggestions of other places in the record that support for the assertion exists. What if there is no citation to the record? Click on a factual statement in a brief and ClearBrief will direct you to any evidentiary support in the source documents for that assertion. It grades the match against the statement in the brief. ClearBrief provides the same check for legal citations, jumping right to the pin cite. The same process works for checking an award against the record and legal citations. ClearBrief enables you to cite the evidentiary support in the award.
This provides the potential for enormous time saving, not to mention ensuring accuracy in our awards.
- Building chronologies and statements of fact based on those chronologies.
Chronologies of the events leading up to the dispute and procedural chronologies are critical building blocks for award. ClearBrief can generate chronologies in minutes. The arbitrator can select which source documents she or he wants scoured for a chronology. Chronologies can be formatted in tables or as bullet points.
A statement of facts then can be generated from a chronology. I’ve done this in several matters. The downside? The ClearBrief-generated statements of fact are not in my voice; they are in AI voice. Additionally, I typically learn a case by generating my own chronology. But I think at a minimum it’s a worthwhile exercise to generate a chronology from ClearBrief and check that against one that I create.
- Ensuring consistent citations in an award.
I haven’t used this function yet, but ClearBrief provides the ability to ensure uniformity in factual and legal citations. Once instructed on your chosen format (e.g., state v. federal format, exhibit numbering) ClearBrief will check your work and highlight any inconsistencies that you can then correct.
- AI is here to stay; we need to learn to use it to increase our efficiency and accuracy.
I’ve heard colleagues complain that using ClearBrief only adds more time to drafting awards and orders. That’s true until you achieve a level of familiarity with the tool. It’s not all that intuitive and hard to navigate from one function to another. But I have to believe that ClearBrief will improve as usage increases and more users provide feedback. It’s one important tool we can use to improve our accuracy and efficiency as arbitrators.successfully complete an arbitration proceeding. Adapt your litigation mindset and turn arbitration into an advantage rather than a challenge.
About the Author
